Effects of Solvent Evaporation Methods and Short-Term Room Temperature Storage on High-Coverage Cellular Metabolome Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular metabolomics provides insights into the metabolic processes occurring within cells and can help researchers understand how these processes are regulated and how they relate to cellular function, health, and disease. In this technical note, we investigated the effects of solvent evaporation equipment and storage condition on high-coverage cellular metabolomics. We previously introduced a robust CIL LC-MS-based cellular metabolomics workflow that encompasses various steps, including cell harvest, metabolic quenching, cell lysis, metabolite extraction, differential chemical isotope labeling, and LC-MS analysis. This workflow has consistently served as the cornerstone of our collaborative research and service projects. As a core facility catering to users with diverse research needs and financial resources, we have encountered scenarios requiring short-term sample storage. For example, the need often arises to transport samples at room temperature from user sites to our core facility. Herein, we present a study in which we compared different solvent evaporation methods (specifically, the nitrogen blowdown evaporator, SpeedVac concentrator, and lyophilizer) and diverse storage conditions (including dried samples stored in a freezer, samples stored in a freezer with methanol, dried samples stored at room temperature, and samples stored at room temperature with methanol). Our findings indicate that the choice of solvent evaporation equipment did not significantly impact the cellular metabolome. However, we observed a noteworthy change in the metabolome after 7 days of storage when cells were stored with methanol, regardless of whether they were kept at -80 °C or room temperature, in contrast to cells that were dried and frozen. Importantly, we detected no significant alterations in cells that were dried and stored at room temperature. In conclusion, to ensure the production of high-quality CIL LC-MS metabolomics results, we strongly recommend that, in situations where low-temperature storage is not feasible, cell samples should be thoroughly dried before storage or shipment at room temperature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".